ID the Wrongdoers, Part 1

The Chicago Inspector General's Office (IGO) issued a report on 7/15/10 that described wrongdoing by city employees. In its report the IGO identified the city departments involved and the acts committed—but didn't name most of the wrongdoing employees. Can you identify them? Read the case descriptions below. If you can provide any info to help identify any of the wrongdoing city employees, let us know by clicking on "Contact us" under the "About ChiGov" menu at the top of this page.

Commission on Animal Care and Control (ACC): The IGO found evidence that four dogs were mistakenly euthanized between February and July 2006. In addition, the IGO found that ACC personnel administered euthanasia drugs without legally required supervision. This practice occurred with the knowledge of supervisory personnel, including a staff veterinarian.
    The IGO recommended that eight ACC employees be disciplined as follows: (i) two supervisors be terminated, (ii) one supervisor be suspended for 30 days, (iii) one supervisor receive a written reprimand, (iv) one non-supervisory employee be terminated, (v) one non-supervisory employee be suspended for 30 days, and (vi) two non-supervisory employees be suspended for 3 days.
    ACC disciplined the employees as follows: (i) two supervisors were terminated as recommended; (ii) one supervisor’s suspension was pending; (iii) one supervisor received an oral reprimand rather than the recommended written reprimand; (iv) one non-supervisory employee was terminated as recommended; (v) one non-supervisory employee’s suspension was pending; and (vi) two non-supervisory employees were suspended, one for 3 days as recommended and the other for 1 day contrary to the IGO recommendation of 3 days. Can you help identify any of these employees?
    In another case, the IGO found that an ACC employee clocked in and out improperly and changed timekeeping records to hide the wrongdoing. The employee later lied to IGO investigators about the wrongdoing. The IGO had previously found this employee guilty of serious misconduct (including lying to IGO investigators); for that misconduct ACC suspended the employee for 29 days, negotiated down to 15 days after the employee appealed to the Human Resources Board. For the latest round of wrongdoing the IGO recommended that ACC fire the employee. Instead, ACC suspended the employee for seven days. Can you help identify the employee?

Fire Department (CFD): The IGO found that a supervisory CFD employee in the internal affairs division mishandled a firefighter’s harassment complaint. The supervisory employee bypassed CFD procedures regarding the handling of such complaints. Only after the Chicago Police determined that the offender was a fellow firefighter did the supervisory CFD employee act and open a harassment investigation.
    The IGO recommended that the supervisory employee receive a written reprimand. Instead, CFD gave the supervisory employee an oral reprimand. Can you help identify the employee?

Department of Streets and Sanitation (DSS): The IGO found that Employee A improperly obtained the log-on ID of a retired co-worker and used the ID to improperly access and edit time records. The IGO also found that Employee B failed to deactivate the ID after its owner retired. The IGO recommended that Employee A be suspended for 14 days and that Employee B receive a written reprimand. Instead, DSS gave Employee A a written reprimand and declined to discipline Employee B. Can you help identify either of these employees?